ASSADULLAH ALLIE,SRINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR

ITA 142/ASR/2015Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 March 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal in limine for want of prosecution, citing the principle that the law assists the vigilant. The Tribunal also noted that the appeal was time-barred and would not be restored.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was dismissed for want of prosecution as neither the assessee nor their representative appeared for the hearing. Despite multiple opportunities and attempts to contact the assessee, no representation was made. The appeal was also found to be time-barred.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed for want of prosecution when the assessee fails to appear or provide representation. Whether a time-barred appeal should be admitted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (SMC

Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA

Hearing: 06.03.2019Pronounced: 07.03.2019

Per Sanjay Arora, AM: This is an Appeal by the Assessee arising out of the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Jammu (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 24.12.2014, partly allowing the assessee’s appeal contesting his assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) vide order dated 25.03.2013 for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11. 2. None appeared for and on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing, and neither any adjournment motion stands made. This, despite the fact of proper service of the notice of hearing in-as-much as the same, sent per registered post, sent on 14/2/2019, has not came back un-served. There was no representation even on the earlier occasion, i.e., 06/9/2018

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →